Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 680 (PAT)

National Insurance Company v. Hemanti Devi

2012-04-26

RAKESH KUMAR

body2012
ORAL ORDER Heard Shri Ashok Priyadarshi, learned counsel for the appellant on Interlocutory Application i.e. I.A. No.2350 of 2012 for condoning delay in filing the appeal. Delay of 130 days has occurred in filing the appeal. 2. In view of the ground set forth in the petition, delay in filing the appeal stands condoned. 3. The present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act,1988 has been preferred against the judgment dated 23.9.2010 and award dated 20.1.2011 passed by Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal Cum 6th Additional District Judge, Patna in Claim Case No.80 of 2007. The learned tribunal, while allowing the claim petition, has directed the insurer/appellant of offending vehicle to pay total compensation amount of Rs.4,09,500/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition to the claimants. The compensation amount includes consortium funeral expenses and loss of estate. The appeal has been primarily preferred on the ground that the driver of the offending vehicle was not having valid driving license and as such the appellant i.e. Insurance Company of the offending vehicle was not liable to pay the compensation amount, but owner/driver were liable to pay the compensation amount. 4. Short fact of the case is that on 7.1.2007, while one Nilesh Choudhary was moving on a motorcycle, a Bus bearing registration no.BR-9A00801 being driven rashly and negligently dashed the motorcycle causing serious injury and on the spot itself, Nilesh Choudhary died. Thereafter, an F.I.R. vide Fatuha P.S. Case No.6 of 2007 was registered for the offence under Sections 279 and 304 of the Indian Penal Code against the driver of the offending Bus. The postmortem examination was conducted on the dead body of the deceased and subsequently, complaint petition was filed by respondent nos.1 to 8. Respondent no.1 is the widow of deceased Nilesh Choudhary and respondent nos.2 to 8 are daughters/sons of the deceased. Before the claim tribunal, it was established that the offending vehicle was insured at the time of accident by the appellant. Before the tribunal, the owner and driver had also appeared and brought on record driving license to show that driver having valid license was driving the vehicle at the time of accident. However, the Insurance Company disputed the legality of the driving license. Before the tribunal, the owner and driver had also appeared and brought on record driving license to show that driver having valid license was driving the vehicle at the time of accident. However, the Insurance Company disputed the legality of the driving license. The Insurance Company also raised dispute that offending bus was not having valid road permit and as such the owner of the vehicle had violated terms and conditions of the Insurance policy. However, before the tribunal, no cogent evidence was brought on record by the Insurance Company to demolish the claim raised by the owner and driver of the vehicle that the driver was having valid driving license. Even though on the record, there were no such evidence, the learned tribunal, while allowing the claim petition granted liberty to the insurer/appellant for recovery of compensation amount after verification of driving license, route permit and also Insurance policy. 5. On perusal of the impugned judgment and award, the court is satisfied that the learned tribunal has committed no error warranting any interference with the same. I do not find any merit in the appeal. 6. The appeal stands dismissed. 7. In view of dismissal of the appeal, the office is required to remit back the statutory amount, which was deposited at the time of filing of the appeal so that payment may be made to the respondent/claimants.